3PB Barrister Michelle Marnham to walk 50 kilometres in aid of Demelza Hospice Care for Children
18th April 2016
On 22nd May, Michelle Marnham will be walking 50 kilometres in aid of Demelza Hospice Care for Children. The walk will be from Sittingborne to Eltham and will take the best part of 11 hours.
If you wish to sponsor Michelle, please click here. More information on her chosen charity can be found here.
Related News
-
3PB Barristers (3 Paper Buildings) is delighted to announce that Jon Ward has joined its seven-office Property and Estates team, further strengthening Chambers’ nationwide reputation and expertise for chancery, real property and agricultural law. Jon joins from Magdalen Chambers in Exeter, where he retains an affiliate membership and close links. Jon (pictured here) was called to the Bar in 2019 (Middle Temple) after practising as a solicitor from 2016 as a partner in a respected...
Continue reading -
As pets become cherished family members rather than mere possessions, disputes over their custody can be emotionally charged during divorce or separation. 3PB’s family law barrister Imogen Robins will present on Monday 3 November at 2:30pm a 90 minute webinar for MBL focused on navigating this difficult issue. During this interactive webinar, Imogen will Explain the legal status of pets in England and Wales Analyse case law - a deep dive Compare international comparative law...
Continue reading -
3PB's regulatory and disciplinary barrister Sunyana Sharma represented a dental practitioner at misconduct proceedings for allegations of failing to treat colleagues with dignity and respect, in which it was alleged she had bullied and persistently called a colleague with whom her professional relationship had broken down and that she had failed to maintain her professional behaviour by wanting to fight with another colleague. The hearing included successful half time submissions on two of the charges...
Continue reading -
3PB criminal law barrister Nate Lara (pictured here) has been successful in the Court of Appeal, arguing that the original sentence imposed in the Crown Court was manifestly excessive and wrong in principle. The defendant received a sentence of imprisonment of 30 months. Nate argued that despite the aggravating features the sentence was excessive, going outside the range in the relevant sentencing guidelines, without sufficient justification for doing so. Nate also argued that the court...
Continue reading
